Cited by 148Political Science Research and EducationPhilosophy of Biology and Scientific ExplanationQualitative Comparative Analysis Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Model Discipline

Clarke, Kevin A., Primo, David M.·2012·A Model DisciplinePolitical Science and the Logic of Representations

Abstract

Models have come to be the dominant feature of modern political science and can be found in every corner of the field. Despite this ubiquity, most political scientists know very little about models, their properties, or how to think about models in a rigorous fashion, all despite the fact that political scientists are highly skilled at model construction. This chapter introduces the model-based view of science that is advocated in this book. It is contrasted with the dominant way of thinking in the field: theory testing. The chapter also introduces the five main themes of the book: science is not what we think it is; current practice is not “philosophy-free”; models are objects; models are not tested with data; and theoretical models are necessary components of explanations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195382198.003.0001

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Clarke, K. A., & Primo, D. M.
Venue
A Model DisciplinePolitical Science and the Logic of Representations
Published
2012-01-20
Pages
1-19
OpenAlex
W2481348753
Cited by
148
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
79.95
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Keywords
theory testing, philosophy of science, theoretical model, explanation, scientific rigor, model development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review